OTHER FORMATIVE BOOKS

We do not know of any other books which deserve to be classed with the two we have been considering in their relation to the formation of Mr. Lincoln's religious ideas; but our inquiry is at a point where it will be instructive to learn of any collateral influence which at this period, the period of the 50's, after the death of Eddie, and before his election as President, helped to give shape to his convictions.

Mr. Lincoln did not unite with Dr. Smith's church. It is difficult to think that it would have been possible for him to have done so. Old-school Calvinism had its permanent influence upon him through his Baptist antecedents, but while that of Dr. Smith came to him most opportunely, it did not wholly meet his spiritual requirements.

For many years Herndon was in regular correspondence with Theodore Parker. They agreed in their view of the slavery question, and had much in common in their religion. Herndon had Parker's theological books, and Lincoln read them, not very thoroughly, perhaps, but with interest.

About the same time, Mr. Jesse W. Fell, for whom he wrote the first sketch of his life, presented him with the works of William E. Channing.

When Herndon was gathering material to confute Dr. Reed, he assembled very nearly everything that seemed to prove that Lincoln was not orthodox, however far short it fell of proving him an infidel. Among the rest he interviewed Fell, and from his statements made up this report, which appeared in Lamon's book, and subsequently in Herndon's:

"Mr. Jesse W. Fell of Illinois, who had the best opportunities of knowing Mr. Lincoln intimately, makes the following statement of his religious opinions, derived from repeated conversations with him on the subject:

"'Though everything relating to the character and history of this extraordinary personage is of interest, and should be fairly stated to the world, I enter upon the performance of this duty—for so I regard it—with some reluctance, arising from the fact, that, in stating my convictions on the subject, I must necessarily place myself in opposition to quite a number who have written on this topic before me, and whose views largely preoccupy the public mind. This latter fact, whilst contributing to my embarrassment on this subject, is, perhaps, the strongest reason, however, why the truth in this matter should be fully disclosed; and I therefore yield to your request. If there were any traits of character that stood out in bold relief in the person of Mr. Lincoln, they were those of truth and candor. He was utterly incapable of insincerity, or professing views on this or any other subject he did not entertain. Knowing such to be his true character, that insincerity, much more duplicity, were traits wholly foreign to his nature, many of his old friends were not a little surprised at finding, in some of the biographies of this great man, statements concerning his religious opinions so utterly at variance with his known sentiments. True, he may have changed or modified those sentiments after his removal from among us, though this is hardly reconcilable with the history of the man, and his entire devotion to public matters during his four years' residence at the national capital. It is possible, however, that this may be the proper solution of this conflict of opinions; or, it may be, that, with no intention on the part of anyone to mislead the public mind, those who have represented him as believing in the popular theological views of the times may have misapprehended him, as experience shows to be quite common where no special effort has been made to attain critical accuracy on a subject of this nature. This is the more probable from the well-known fact, that Mr. Lincoln seldom communicated to anyone his views on this subject. But, be this as it may, I have no hesitation whatever in saying, that, whilst he held many opinions in common with the great mass of Christian believers, he did not believe in what are regarded as the orthodox or evangelical views of Christianity.

"'On the innate depravity of man, the character and office of the great Head of the Church, the atonement, the infallibility of the written revelation, the performance of miracles, the nature and design of present and future rewards and punishments (as they are probably called), and many other subjects, he held opinions utterly at variance with what are usually taught in the church. I should say that his expressed views on these and kindred topics were such as, in the estimation of most believers, would place him entirely outside the Christian pale. Yet, to my mind, such was not the true position, since his principles and practices and the spirit of his whole life were of the very kind we universally agree to call Christian; and I think this conclusion is in no wise affected by the circumstance that he never attached himself to any religious society whatever.

"'His religious views were eminently practical, and are summed up, as I think, in these two propositions: "the Fatherhood of God, and the brotherhood of man." He fully believed in a superintending and overruling Providence, that guides and controls the operations of the world, but maintained that law and order, and not the violation or suspension, are the appointed means by which this providence is expressed.

"'I will not attempt any specification of either his belief or disbelief on various religious topics, as derived from conversations with him at different times during a considerable period; but, as conveying a general view of his religious or theological opinions, will state the following facts. Some eight or ten years prior to his death, in conversing with him upon this subject, the writer took occasion to refer, in terms of approbation, to the sermons and writings generally of Dr. W. E. Channing; and, finding he was considerably interested in the statement I made of the opinions held by that author, I proposed to present him [Lincoln] a copy of Channing's entire works, which I soon after did. Subsequently, the contents of these volumes, together with the writings of Theodore Parker, furnished him, as he informed me, by his friend and law partner, Mr. Herndon, became naturally the topics of conversation with us; and though far from believing there was an entire harmony of views on his part with either of those authors, yet they were generally much admired and approved by him.

"'No religious views with him seemed to find any favor, except of the practical and rationalistic order; and if, from my recollections on this subject, I was called upon to designate an author whose views most nearly represented Mr. Lincoln's on this subject, I would say that author was Theodore Parker.

"'As you have asked from me a candid statement of my recollections on this topic, I have thus briefly given them, with the hope that they may be of some service in rightly settling a question about which—as I have good reason to believe—the public mind has been greatly misled.

"'Not doubting that they will accord, substantially, with your own recollections, and that of his other intimate and confidential friends, and with the popular verdict after this matter shall have been properly canvassed, I submit them.'"—Lamon: Life of Lincoln, pp. 490, 491, 492.

Herndon was attempting to collect evidence that Lincoln was an infidel, and what he obtained, and what essentially he was called to certify and did certify in effect, was that Lincoln's views were in essential accord with those of Theodore Parker and William Ellery Channing. Theodore Parker was not an orthodox Christian according to the standards of Dr. Smith's church, or of the church of which the present writer is pastor, but he was a Christian, and a very brave and noble Christian. William Ellery Channing's views were not in full accord with the orthodoxy of his day, but he was a noble friend of God and man, and a true Christian.

I have already referred to the very loose and inexact way in which Herndon and others use the term "infidel" as applied to Lincoln. Such inexactness is subversive of all clear thinking.

We are told, for instance, that he was an infidel, his views being essentially those of Theodore Parker and William Ellery Channing. I doubt if he ever read very deeply in the writings of these men; but that he read portions of them and approved of some of their noblest and most characteristic utterances, is certain. What were the discourses of these two men which he must almost certainly have read if he read anything of theirs? He would almost certainly have read Parker's discourse on "The Transient and Permanent in Christianity," and that on "Immortal Life," and Channing's Baltimore address and his discourse on the Church. And these are just the sort of utterances which he would have read with approval as he found them in these discourses of Theodore Parker:

"Compare the simpleness of Christianity, as Christ sets it forth on the Mount, with what is sometimes taught and accepted in that honored name, and what a difference! One is of God, one is of man. There is something in Christianity which sects have not reached,—something that will not be won, we fear, by theological battles, or the quarrels of pious men; still we may rejoice that Christ is preached in any way. The Christianity of sects, of the pulpit, of society, is ephemeral,—a transitory fly. It will pass off and be forgot. Some new form will take its place, suited to the aspect of the changing times. Each will represent something of truth, but no one the whole. It seems the whole race of man is needed to do justice to the whole of truth, as 'the whole church to preach the whole gospel.' Truth is intrusted for the time to a perishable ark of human contrivance. Though often shipwrecked, she always comes safe to land, and is not changed by her mishap. That pure ideal religion which Jesus saw on the mount of his vision, and lived out in the lowly life of a Galilean peasant; which transforms his cross into an emblem of all that is holiest on earth; which makes sacred the ground he trod, and is dearest to the best of men, most true to what is truest in them,—cannot pass away. Let men improve never so far in civilization, or soar never so high on the wings of religion and love, they can never outgo the flight of truth and Christianity. It will always be above them. It is as if we were to fly towards a star, which becomes larger and more bright the nearer we approach, till we enter and are absorbed in its glory."—Theodore Parker: The Transient and Permanent in Christianity, p. 31.

"I would not slight this wondrous world. I love its day and night: its flowers and its fruits are dear to me. I would not willfully lose sight of a departing cloud. Every year opens new beauty in a star, or in a purple gentian fringed with loveliness. The laws, too, of matter seem more wonderful, the more I study them, in the whirling eddies of the dust, in the curious shells of former life buried by thousands in a grain of chalk, or in the shining diagrams of light above my head. Even the ugly becomes beautiful when truly seen. I see the jewel in the bunchy toad. The more I live, the more I love this lovely world,—feel more its Author in each little thing, in all that is great. But yet I feel my immortality the more. In childhood the consciousness of immortal life buds forth feeble, though full of promise. In the man it unfolds its fragrant petals, his most celestial flower, to mature its seed throughout eternity. The prospect of that everlasting life, the perfect justice yet to come, the infinite progress before us, cheer and comfort the heart. Sad and disappointed, full of self-reproach, we shall not be so forever. The light of heaven breaks upon the night of trial, sorrow, sin: the somber clouds which overhung the east, grown purple now, tell us the dawn of heaven is coming in. Our faces, gleamed on by that, smile in the new-born glow. We are beguiled of our sadness before we are aware. The certainty of this provokes us to patience, it forbids us to be slothfully sorrowful. It calls us to be up and doing. The thought that all will at last be right with the slave, the poor, the weak, and the wicked, inspires us with zeal to work for them here, and make it all right for them even now."—Theodore Parker: Immortality, pp. 23-24.

It is affirmed that Lincoln was an infidel, believing essentially the same as Theodore Parker: and he himself expressed such admiration for and accord with the utterances of Parker which he knew that the statement is partly true. These two quotations, from two of the most easily accessible of Parker's discourses, represent the kind of teaching which Lincoln assimilated from Theodore Parker and show us what kind of infidelity Lincoln learned from him.

When Lincoln turned to the most widely circulated of Channing's discourses, he read such utterances as these:

"We regard the Scriptures as the records of God's successive revelations to mankind, and particularly of the last and most perfect revelation of His will by Jesus Christ. Whatever doctrines seem to us to be clearly taught in the Scriptures, we receive without reserve or exception. We do not, however, attach equal importance to all the books in this collection.

"Our leading principle in interpreting Scripture is this, that the Bible is a book written for men, in the language of men, and that its meaning is to be sought in the same manner as that of other books. We believe that God, when He speaks to the human race, conforms, if we may so say, to the established rules of speaking and writing. How else would the Scriptures avail us more than if communicated in an unknown tongue?

"If God be infinitely wise, He cannot sport with the understandings of His creatures. A wise teacher discovers his wisdom in adapting himself to the capacities of his pupils, not in perplexing them with what is unintelligible, not in distressing them with apparent contradictions, not in filling them with a skeptical distrust of their own powers. An infinitely wise teacher, who knows the precise extent of our minds, and the best method of enlightening them, will surpass all other instructors in bringing down truth to our apprehension, and in showing its loveliness and harmony. We ought, indeed, to expect occasional obscurity in such a book as the Bible, which was written for past and future ages, as well as for the present. But God's wisdom is a pledge, that whatever is necessary for us, and necessary for salvation, is revealed too plainly to be mistaken, and too consistently to be questioned, by a sound and upright mind. It is not the mark of wisdom to use an unintelligible phraseology, to communicate what is above our capacities, to confuse and unsettle the intellect by appearances of contradiction. We honor our heavenly teacher too much to ascribe to Him such a revelation. A revelation is a gift of light. It cannot thicken our darkness, and multiply our perplexities.

"We believe, too, that God is just; but we never forget that His justice is the justice of a good being, dwelling in the same mind, and acting in harmony with perfect benevolence. By this attribute, we understand God's infinite regard to virtue or moral worth, expressed in a moral government; that is, in giving excellent and equitable laws, and in conferring such rewards and inflicting such punishments, as are best fitted to secure their observance. God's justice has for its end the highest virtue of the creation, and it punishes for this end alone, and thus it coincides with benevolence; for virtue and happiness, though not the same, are inseparably conjoined.

"God's justice, thus viewed, appears to us to be in perfect harmony with His mercy. According to the prevalent systems of theology, these attributes are so discordant and jarring, that to reconcile them is the hardest task, and the most wonderful achievement, of infinite wisdom. To us they seem to be intimate friends, always at peace, breathing the same spirit, and seeking the same end. By God's mercy, we understand not a blind, instinctive compassion, which forgives without reflection, and without regard to the interests of virtue. This, we acknowledge, would be incompatible with justice, and also with enlightened benevolence. God's mercy, as we understand it, desires strongly the happiness of the guilty, but only through their penitence."—W. E. Channing: Baltimore Discourse of 1819, Passim.

"Inward sanctity, pure love, disinterested attachment to God and man, obedience of heart and life, sincere excellence of character, this is the one thing needful, this the essential thing in religion; and all things else, ministers, churches, ordinances, places of worship, all are but means, helps, secondary influences, and utterly worthless when separated from this. To imagine that God regards any thing but this, that He looks at any thing but the heart, is to dishonor Him, to express a mournful insensibility to His pure character. Goodness, purity, virtue, this is the only distinction in God's sight. This is intrinsically, essentially, everlastingly, and by its own nature, lovely, beautiful, glorious, divine. It owes nothing to time, to circumstance to outward connections. It shines by its own light. It is the sun of the spiritual universe. It is God himself dwelling in the human soul. Can any man think lightly of it, because it has not grown up in a certain church, or exalt any church above it? My friends, one of the grandest truths of religion is the supreme importance of character, of virtue, of that divine spirit which shone out in Christ. The grand heresy is, to substitute any thing for this, whether creed, or form, or church."—W. E. Channing: Discourse on the Church, pp. 23-24.

If Lincoln was made an infidel or confirmed in his infidelity by his reading of William Ellery Channing, the foregoing is a reasonable sample of the quality of his infidelity: for these are not only characteristic utterances of Channing: they are among the utterances which Lincoln was most certain to have had thrust into his hand, and most likely to have read and to have approved.

The author of this work is not a Unitarian, and he is ready, on any proper occasion, to define to anyone who has a right to know, his own opinions in contradistinction from those of the Unitarian churches. But his loyalty to his own convictions lays upon him no obligation to be unfair to men who hold opinions other than his own. It is to be noted that it is Mr. Herndon, and not some bigoted exponent of orthodoxy, who calls Theodore Parker an infidel. The present writer holds no such opinion of Parker, nor yet of Channing. On the contrary, he is of opinion that their writings were beneficial to Abraham Lincoln, as helping him to define some of his own views constructively and reverently. While Beecher or Bushnell might have done it as well or better, it was not their books which Jesse Fell gave to Lincoln; and Lincoln used what he had. To say that Lincoln's views were like those of Parker or Channing is to affirm that Lincoln was not an infidel, but a Christian.

Was Lincoln, then, a Unitarian?

No. Of Unitarianism he knew nothing, so far as we are informed. He knew the views of certain Unitarians, and these assisted him at important points in defining certain aspects of his faith.

There have been rumors that Mr. Lincoln did come into actual contact with organized Unitarianism. I have been interested in inquiring whether this was true. During the Billy Sunday meetings in Paterson, New Jersey, in 1916, the Unitarians opened a booth there for the distribution of their literature, and there were certain communications in the local press resulting from the counter-irritation of those meetings. Among these was one in the Paterson Guardian, signed "Once-in-Awhile." It said:

"The following is, in part, a sketch of my own youthful experience, together with a statement of facts that relate to others who long since have passed on.

"In 1851-52 the Chicago & Alton Railroad was being built, and I was employed on a section of the work at that time. Our section extended from Springfield, Illinois, to a little town called Chatham, situated near the Sangamon River, a distance of about ten miles south from Springfield. The majority of the people who had located in that part of the country at that time were from the central part of New York State, and among them was Elder Shipman, a Unitarian. He was a very able preacher and 'made good' with all who knew him in the Sangamon country. It was not long before he received a call to preach in Springfield. The little Unitarian church there was located just around the corner from Capitol Square. When Elder Shipman was permanently located there, Abraham Lincoln became a regular and seemingly much interested attendant. Nearly all of the boys in our 'gang' had known Elder Shipman way back in New York State, and, there being no ball games or other amusements save an occasional horse race, almost every Sunday all hands would saddle horses and gallop to Springfield to attend the services conducted there by our old-time pastor. At the close of the regular service Mr. Lincoln was often called upon for a few remarks, and many of his sayings are still fresh in my mind today, although that was sixty-three years ago. Since then, in the quiet hours that have passed, I often find myself looking back through the mist of vanished years and fancy I feel the grip of his great, bony hand in mine, or rather mine in his, and hear his kindly voice saying, 'Boys, good-by, come again. Come often!'

"I am not saying that Mr. Lincoln subscribed to the Unitarian articles of faith, but I have good and sufficient reason to believe that he did, and, if I am not mistaken, the proof is wanting that he ever subscribed to faith in articles of any other religious denomination."

I challenged the veracity of this letter, reprinting it in The Advance, of which I was editor, and asking these questions:

1. Who is Mr. Once-in-Awhile, and why does he not sign his real name?

2. How does it happen that no one else of those who attended the alleged Unitarian church in Springfield in the days when Lincoln is supposed to have been there has risen up to tell this story some time during the last half century; and why does it come to us from Paterson and not from Springfield?

3. Who is this Elder Shipman concerning whom this letter tells us? We are informed that the Unitarian Year Book shows no such man.

4. Where was this Unitarian church "just around the corner from Capitol Square"? Around which corner, and what became of it?

We are informed that there was no Unitarian church in Springfield sixty-three years ago. We were not there and do not know: but if one was there, where was it? When was it organized? Who were its ministers?

5. With so popular a preacher as Mr. Shipman appears to have been, is it altogether likely that he would have made the habit of calling upon a layman who attended his church to speak at the close of the service?

6. If Mr. Lincoln was in the habit of attending this Unitarian church, how did the Presbyterian church of Springfield get the impression that Mr. Lincoln attended there with his wife, and why did he continue to attend the Presbyterian church after he went to Washington?

7. Lincoln is known to have said that if he knew any church whose only creed was the command of Jesus to love God with all one's heart and his neighbor as himself, he would join that church, and Unitarians have frequently declared that if Mr. Lincoln had ever come into contact with the Unitarian Church he must on the basis of that declaration have united with it. We are not clear if their inference is correct, but we are clear that there has been a very general impression among Unitarians that he was not familiar with that church and creed.

We do not call in question the veracity of Mr. Once-in-Awhile, whoever he may be. We merely do what we have done before, we ask for one or two facts. If anybody knows that Abraham Lincoln habitually attended a Unitarian church and frequently participated in its public service by speaking at the close of the sermon, let him now speak or else forever hold his peace.

Everybody held his peace, including Mr. Once-in-Awhile!

---

Such stories are rarely made out of whole cloth. I therefore inquired of the Christian Register (Unitarian) and the Christian Leader (Universalist) to learn if they knew any basis of truth in the above statement, and they did not know and were not able to learn anything accurate about it. However, there came to me in the course of the inquiry, which was of necessity not very thorough for lack of anything definite to begin with, an impression, based on information too vague to be cited, that there was a Mr. Shipman, a Universalist rather than a Unitarian, whose occasional services in Springfield Mr. Lincoln attended once or more and enjoyed. But this came to me very vaguely, and may be far from the truth.

Whether there be a ten per cent. modicum of fact at the root of the above letter I will not attempt to guess, for my own information is too meager. The picture, as a whole, of Mr. Lincoln preaching Unitarianism from a Unitarian pulpit, and at the close assuming charge of the service of farewell and exhorting the railroad hands to come again is too far from the possible truth to require very close analysis.

The Unitarian books which Mr. Lincoln read cursorily, the books by Parker and Channing, must have assisted him in this, that they gave assurance that there were forward-looking men who believed in God and in human freedom as he did, and who were quite as far from holding the teaching which he had been taught to call orthodox as he was, yet who were not infidels, but counted themselves friends of God and disciples of Jesus Christ.

Herndon asserts that Lincoln habitually spoke in his presence in terms of denial of the supernatural birth of Jesus. On this point I have seen but one bit of documentary evidence, and that of unique interest, in two words written in a book that once belonged to Lincoln. The book is entitled Exercises in the Syntax of the Greek Language, by Rev. William Nielson, D.D., and contains two appendixes by Prof. Charles Anthon, noted as a Greek scholar and the author of a Greek Grammar and other textbooks. It was published by T. & J. Swords in New York, in 1825. At the bottom of page 34 is a sentence, shortened and modified from John 16:27, and printed in parallel Greek and English,—

The words "from God" are erased with pen, and the words, "from nature" substituted, apparently in the handwriting of Mr. Lincoln. This, if its genuineness be established, would appear to be conclusive that at the time Lincoln owned this book he denied the supernatural birth of Jesus.

The book was formerly a part of the noted collection of Mr. John E. Burton, procured by him from the collection of Dr. J. B. English, and was retained by Mr. Burton with other unique items when his large collection was broken up some years ago. I was privileged to examine the book by A. C. McClurg & Co., in April, 1919; the book being then and possibly still owned by them.

That the book was once owned by Lincoln would appear certain. His signature on the flyleaf is in his firm, mature hand, written as he was accustomed to write it until some time after he became President, "A. Lincoln." The ownership would appear to be still further attested by an inscription on the inside of the front cover, "Compliments to Master Abe Lincoln, and good success, truly yours, Charles Anthon, Columbia College." But this inscription raises more questions than it answers. I am not familiar with the handwriting of Professor Anthon, but I am disposed to question the genuineness of this inscription. That it has been received as genuine by previous owners of the book is attested by the fact that another hand has written before "Columbia College" the words "A Prof." evidently that Professor Anthon might be properly introduced to persons who did not know him. Professor Anthon was a noted classical scholar, but I cannot help wondering at what period of his career he could have come into personal touch with Abraham Lincoln. Not, certainly, in 1825, when the book was published, and when Lincoln was sixteen years old. And at what later period would Professor Anthon have addressed him as "Master Abe Lincoln"?

If Anthon came to know Lincoln personally so as to care to present him with one of his books, it would seem as if he would have given him a book of which he was the sole or chief author, and not one in which his part was confined to the appendix. Anthon's interest in the Greek was primarily classical, and that of the author of this work was primarily Biblical. If Anthon came to know Lincoln it would probably have been after Lincoln had become a national figure, say in 1848 or some later year, by which time a book issued in 1825 would have become an old story to an author engaged in publishing new books.

Let me, then, in the absence of direct evidence, venture the hypothesis that the book was really owned by Lincoln; that it came into his possession not earlier than the time when, having mastered Kirkham's Grammar, he welcomed the ownership of a book which suggested the possible knowledge of a classical tongue. That he bought the book is hardly probable; that it was the gift of Professor Anthon is improbable, because there would appear to have been no contact between the two at a period when such a gift would have been appropriate: let us assume, then, that someone else gave him the book, and that the attribution to Professor Anthon is the conjectural record of a later owner.[47]

The book might conceivably have come into Lincoln's possession through the Green boys, or the brother of Ann Rutledge, returning from Illinois College to New Salem; for it was a book which might easily have been floating around Jacksonville, and picked up by a student there, and later discarded because he had no special interest in the Greek of the New Testament. Lincoln would have been more likely to feel a passing interest in it then than at any other period of his career, for he was widening his educational horizon, and had not as yet set any limits to his learning in one or another direction. He might have picked it up, or it might have been handed him by some minister, during his early years in Springfield; but by that time Lincoln must have given up any passing notion that he might ever learn Greek. He could hardly have procured it and would not have cared for it before he lived in New Salem: he must have ceased to think of the possibility of learning Greek before he had lived long in Springfield.

I assume, also, that the erasure of the words "from God" and the substitution of the words "from nature" is in Lincoln's hand; though the two words are written at the very bottom of the page, with no support for the hand, and are not as well written as the signature, and their authenticity might be questioned. I am disposed to think that he wrote it, and this, evidently, was the opinion of Mr. Burton, as indicated by a note in the book in his handwriting.

It might be mentioned in passing that the word "God" is not in this verse in the New Testament, either Greek or English. It reads, "Ye have loved me, and have believed that I came forth from the Father." Perhaps if Dr. Nielson had followed the text literally, Lincoln would not have troubled to amend it.

I accept it as a genuine document, and one of real interest; but the lack of a date makes it almost valueless as proof of Lincoln's settled belief. I place it, conjecturally, in the New Salem period of his life, though it may date from the beginning of his life in Springfield.

I have not read the entire book, nor compared the Greek throughout with the English, but I note that in this passage the English is not translated from the Greek, but the Greek is translated backward from the English, and that inexactly. I judge this to be not the effect of bad scholarship but the result of a desire to convey a lesson. For instance, the Greek of this passage is made into a personal confession by the change of person in the first part of the verse, without corresponding change in the second part, leaving the first verb without a direct object, so that a literal translation reads,—

"I love and believe that I came forth from God."

Dr. Nielson probably knew why he did it so, but Professor Anthon would have been likely to say that that was not very good Greek syntax. It served its purpose, however, as showing, what this section was intended to show, the various uses of the Greek conjunctions.

Lincoln, it may be presumed, got little if anything out of the Greek. I find no mark of his except on this and the facing page. There he found two admonitions which he boxed in, and made a note of them on the false-title:

In the front of the book he wrote a reference to this, and added,

Deliberate slowly but
execute promptly.
Think well and do your duty.

These precepts seemed to impress him; and they were certainly characteristic of him. But we can draw no very wide deduction from his use of the Greek or the substitution of the word in the translation.

---